Chatpack MCP vs Evidence
A side-by-side look at the Chatpack MCP and Evidence MCP servers: transport, auth, tools, quality signals, and the config to install either one in Claude, Cursor, Windsurf or VS Code.
Verdict: choose Chatpack MCP for developer tools work as a local process; choose Evidence for developer tools as a local process. You can also run both side by side in one mcpServers block.
Which MCP server should you choose?
Choose Chatpack MCP when
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer a local stdio subprocess transport.
- Its auth model fits you: No auth required.
- You want tools like
search_docs, get_document, get_integration_guide.
Choose Evidence when
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer a local stdio subprocess transport.
- You want tools like
issue_receipt, verify_receipt, record_disclosure.
Feature & specification comparison
Rows where the two servers differ are marked.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Category | Developer Tools | Developer Tools |
| Quality signal | 86/100 · Excellent | 63/100 · Good |
| Install command | Confirmed | Confirmed |
| Transport | Local subprocess (stdio) | Local subprocess (stdio) |
| Auth | No auth required | Not declared |
| Pricing | Free | Not declared |
| Required env vars | None listed | None listed |
| Verified owner | Verified | Community listing |
| GitHub stars | 224 | 1 |
| Directory activity | 3 views 0 installs 0 upvotes | 1 views 0 installs 0 upvotes |
| Tools | 5 | 9 |
| Full listing | View Chatpack MCP | View Evidence |
Tools & capabilities
Chatpack MCP tools 5
search_docsSearch bundled Chatpack documentation and the authoritative llms reference. Returns document ids, links and matching excerpts with package versions.get_documentRead a complete bundled Chatpack document by id. Use llms for the authoritative integration contract or concepts/errors for troubleshooting.get_integration_guideRetrieve the repository's framework setup guide with authentication guidance and the authoritative llms reference. Examples match the bundled package versions.list_ui_blocksList public runtime exports of @chatpack/ui, including components, providers and utilities. Returns names accepted by get_ui_block.get_ui_blockRetrieve a public @chatpack/ui export's source module and usage guide. Optionally include supporting UI modules and stylesheet. Files are reference source, not a standalone copy-and-paste component.
Evidence tools 9
issue_receiptIssue an x402 offer-receipt (EIP-712) plus a Tersign compliance record (returned as `compliance`; verify_compliance_record checks it) for a payment that has ALREADY settled; when a ledger is configured, the ledger counter-signs the receipt into your hash chain, while the compliance-fields record is not counter-signed and is bound to its receipt only by your own signature, which covers the receipt's digest. Use this for money that moved; use record_disclosure for a non-payment agent action. Side effects: signs with your signing key (the one set in the Tersign plugin's settings in Claude Code, or the TERSIGN_* environment variables, else the one generated and kept locally on first run), and performs ONE network write to the ledger when a ledger URL, API key and seller id are set there too (without them it signs locally and returns an unchained artifact). Returns the signed receipt artifact, its keccak256 canonical digest, and — when chained — the ledger counter-signature and sequence number.verify_receiptVerify an x402 offer-receipt artifact, fully OFFLINE (no network, no API key, no account; checks no ledger or chain): recover the address whose key produced its EIP-712 signature over the six signed payload fields (version, network, resourceUrl, payer, issuedAt, transaction), and compute its canonical digest (the content address a ledger records it under). Recovery yields SOME address for any payload, so without expectedSigner the signer is UNAUTHENTICATED: valid:true then proves neither who signed nor that the receipt is unmodified — an edited receipt recovers a different address and still returns valid:true. Pass expectedSigner, the issuer's address obtained out-of-band, to bind it: valid:true then means the signed fields were signed by that key; a mismatch returns valid:false with the recovered signer so you can see who actually signed. Use this for a receipt (money); use verify_compliance_record for the compliance record issue_receipt returns beside a receipt. Returns { verdict, valid, signer, signerStatus: BOUND | UNAUTHENTICATED | MISMATCH, signerBound, testKey? (the signer is a PUBLISHED test key — anyone can sign as it), digest, unsignedFields? (present in the artifact but not covered by the signature), reason? }. Read verdict first.record_disclosureOne-call disclosure evidence (EU AI Act Art 50 dialect): digests the disclosure text LOCALLY, signs an action record with your key, and the public ledger counter-signs it into your per-signer hash chain. No API key needed — the first call self-provisions a free signer-keyed account, except when your key is already registered to an API-key account (409) or the daily provisioning caps are reached (429; https://tersign.ai/pricing).verify_compliance_recordVerify ONE record type: the compliance record that issue_receipt returns beside a receipt (`compliance`: a ComplianceRecordV1 `record` plus its ComplianceAttestation `attestation`, EIP-712 domain "compliance-fields"), fully OFFLINE (no network, no API key, no account): recompute the record's canonical digest, check that the attestation's signed payload names that exact digest and the same receiptDigest as the record, and recover the address that signed the attestation. It does NOT verify the disclosure record record_disclosure returns: that is a different record type (an action record, EIP-712 domain "tersign action-record"), and passed here it fails with a digest mismatch that says nothing about tampering. Use verify_receipt for the payment receipt itself. Without expectedSigner the signer is UNAUTHENTICATED and valid:true proves internal consistency only — anyone can edit a record, recompute its digest and re-sign the attestation with their own key, and still get valid:true with a different signer. Pass expectedSigner, obtained out-of-band, to bind authorship. Returns { verdict, valid, signer, signerStatus: BOUND | UNAUTHENTICATED | MISMATCH, signerBound, testKey? (a PUBLISHED test key — anyone can sign as it), digest (the recomputed record digest), reason? }. Read verdict first.record_refundLog a refund against a receipt already on your chain, as the SELLER. The ledger stores it as a PENDING refund entry that references the original receipt digest; the entry is NOT counter-signed or appended to the hash chain, and it has no digest or sequence number of its own. Nothing is edited or deleted: the original receipt and its chain position stay exactly as they were. Requires a ledger URL, API key and seller id (the Tersign plugin's settings in Claude Code, or the TERSIGN_* environment variables) and performs one network write; errors if the original digest is not on your chain. This RECORDS a refund you have already made — it moves no money. For a signed refund RECORD, build a compliance record with refundOf set to the original record digest (buildMinimalRecord in the SDK). Returns { id, status: "pending" }.open_disputeOpen an objective dispute against a counter-signed receipt as the PAYER (the configured key must be the receipt payer). Reasons: not_delivered, wrong_content, duplicate_charge. Contested non-mechanical claims escalate to the arbiter; duplicate_charge is decided instantly from ledger arithmetic.submit_dispute_evidenceSubmit signed evidence to an open dispute. Claimant evidence must be signed by the payer key; respondent evidence additionally requires the seller API key (the Tersign plugin's settings in Claude Code, or the TERSIGN_* environment variables).adjudicate_disputeTrigger deterministic adjudication of an open dispute: the same inputs always produce the same verdict and rationale — no discretion, no model in the loop — and the verdict object embeds the inputs it was computed from. Side effects: writes the verdict to the dispute record; a refund verdict also logs a PENDING refund entry against the receipt (not counter-signed into the chain; no money moves). Adjudicating twice is not meaningful; the first verdict stands (a second call returns 409). Returns the verdict, the rationale naming the rule applied, the adjudication inputs, the verdict digest, and the ledger signature over that digest.get_disputeFetch a dispute in full: its state, both sides' evidence references, the verdict and rationale once adjudicated, and the ledger signature over the record. Read-only — one network read, no key required, and safe to poll while a dispute is open.
Ready-to-paste client configs
Paste either block (or both) into your client config, e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json. We only show a config when the install command is confirmed.
Chatpack MCP
{
"mcpServers": {
"chatpack-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@chatpack/mcp"
]
}
}
}
Evidence
{
"mcpServers": {
"evidence": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"tersign"
]
}
}
}
Frequently asked questions
Chatpack MCP is categorized under Developer Tools and uses a local stdio subprocess. Evidence belongs to Developer Tools and uses a local stdio subprocess. Pick Chatpack MCP for developer tools work and Evidence for developer tools.
Copy the mcpServers block from the config section on this page into your client's config (for example claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json), then fully restart the client.
Chatpack MCP is listed as free. Auth: no auth required. Evidence has no declared pricing — check the project's own site. If a server needs environment variables such as API keys, define them under the env key in your client's MCP config.
Yes. MCP clients support multiple servers: add chatpack-mcp and evidence as separate keys in the same mcpServers object, and your assistant will call tools from either one.
On AllMCPs, Chatpack MCP has a quality signal of 86/100 (Excellent) with 3 views, 0 installs and 224 GitHub stars. Evidence has 63/100 (Good) with 1 views, 0 installs and 1 GitHub stars.